Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-06-2018, 08:33 AM
 
1,642 posts, read 1,399,746 times
Reputation: 1316

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by saybanana View Post
Reno, NE! Should have been the Las Vegas of the the state of NE!

Reno Nebraska?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-06-2018, 09:19 AM
 
Location: DMV Area
1,296 posts, read 1,219,226 times
Reputation: 2616
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarkar View Post
It doesn't seem to be picking up even a small fraction of the share of the success of nearby Silicon Valley
This is baseless because Sacramento is at least 120 miles away from San Jose/Silicon Valley (so not very close to the technology hub of SV at all) and has its own employment base based on Government, Agriculture, and Post-Secondary Education...it holds its own for what it does and doesn't really seem to be struggling, relatively speaking. There have also been some efforts to bring tech to the area, and it seems as if Sac is emerging as a clean technology hub as well, which is somewhat of a result of its proximity to SV: The hardest job in tech? Convincing start-ups to move to Sacramento

Clean tech industry ‘on a roll’ in the Sacramento region

The brainpower and talent in the tech industry is concentrated in SV and it isn't exactly economically feasible to spread all the way to Sacramento since it's far enough away from that base for it to be a different market, and it isn't pulling from the same pool of talent. That's like saying that Beaumont isn't picking up a share of Houston's success because it's "nearby," when it's far enough away to have its own economy and employment base. Or San Diego-Los Angeles, which are about as far away from each other as Sacramento is from the Silicon Valley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 10:34 AM
 
3,335 posts, read 2,926,301 times
Reputation: 1305
San Jose
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
5,699 posts, read 4,928,100 times
Reputation: 4942
I think most of the cities in the Mississippi river basin have underachieved, this region is America's heartland with a naturally built in transportation network, yet All the major cities seem to be on the periphery of the basin and not actually in it.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ver-new-01.png

Pittsburgh, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Louisville, Nashville, Memphis, Little Rock, St. Louis, Kansas City, Omaha, Des Moines, New Orleans etc.

The only cities in this basin that seem to be doing well are Minneapolis and Denver.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 10:58 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Gilead
12,716 posts, read 7,811,145 times
Reputation: 11338
Oklahoma City, Tulsa
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,978 posts, read 17,288,229 times
Reputation: 7377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escondudo View Post
How so? How big or influential could it have been?
Compare Memphis to other southern cities such as Nashville, Charlotte, and Atlanta over the last 20 years. Aside from FedEx, how has Memphis kept up with the others?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,978 posts, read 17,288,229 times
Reputation: 7377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escondudo View Post
What cities could have been much larger or influential but never lived up to their potential?

Consider development paths, geography, immigration, technology, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18 View Post
Without that context, the use of the term "underachieving" implies achievement only in the present (not the past or future).
I am not sure where the disconnect is, but Detroit is not an underachieving city. Detroit peaked and collapsed, that is not the same thing as underachieving. If Detroit underachieved, it would look more like Cleveland today.

Last edited by Toxic Toast; 08-06-2018 at 11:19 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Louisville
5,294 posts, read 6,063,888 times
Reputation: 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toxic Toast View Post
I am not sure where the disconnect is, but Detroit is not an underachieving city. Detroit peaked and collapsed, that is not the same thing as underachieving. If Detroit underachieved, it would look more like Cleveland today.
Agreed, I had to review the OP before I committed to agreeing though lol. I would say Detroit is a city that is currently under achieving. The thread is more about cities that "never were", or "could have been" if you will. Detroit is a city that "was".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Miami, FL
233 posts, read 344,606 times
Reputation: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
Agreed, I had to review the OP before I committed to agreeing though lol. I would say Detroit is a city that is currently under achieving. The thread is more about cities that "never were", or "could have been" if you will. Detroit is a city that "was".
Precisely!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2018, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
14,353 posts, read 17,027,384 times
Reputation: 12411
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
New Orleans probably would be the size of New York had the British taken Louisiana instead of giving it to the Spanish after the 7 years war, because its likely that New Orleans would have been the center of a settled interior instead of the Erie Canal stealing its thunder.
No. Malaria would have limited the growth potential of New Orleans well into the 20th century. The lowland south was just a terrible place for anyone of European descent to live year round - particularly new immigrants. New Orleans could have gotten bigger, but it never would have been a major U.S. metropolitan area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top